• Open Access close
• Closed Access close
• Restricted close
• Open Source close
• Embargo close
• Publications close
• Research data close
• Other research products close
• Lecture close
• North American Studies close

ispartof: American Novelists’ Autobiographical Acts: Nonfictional Disruptions location:Aix-Marseille Université date:6 Jul - 7 Jul 2023 status: published

This paper has as objective to give some directions on how journalists can regain their ‘lost hero status’. News outlets have to deal with an audience that lost confident in the news media. This reduced confidence may be explained by a reduced quality of journalism, driven by increased economic pressure, cutbacks in news gathering, and a decreased editorial autonomy. A historical event which is still cited as iconic for the mythical status of journalism is the news coverage about the Watergate affair. More specifically, there are the countless references to the work of Bob Woodward and Carl Bernstein, two journalists who worked for the Washington Post at that time. They received their status as celebrity journalists primarily due to the best seller they have written in the course of the events, All the president’s men, and even more to the movie with the same title, with Dustin Hoffman and Robert Redford as the lead actors. Although the affair lasted from 1972 to 1974, so today forty years ago, it still appeals to the imagination of anyone who thinks of what good journalism ought to be (to give just one example: a movie poster of All the President’s Men sticks to the apartment walls of journalist Katrine Fønsmark in the successful Danish TV series Borgen). Understanding the way of how Woodward and Bernstein dealt with the events might help to ‘upgrade’ the status of journalists today. The research questions are: What lessons can be learned from the way Woodward and Bernstein covered the events forty years ago? Are these practices still useful today, and if not, why not? This would give us a clue whether or not current journalists would still be able to break a story as Watergate. The method consists of a critical reading of the book of the two journalists, a literature review and personal meetings with Bob Woodward and Carl Bernstein at the University of Texas Austin (that purchased and manages the archives of the two journalists). The paper is structured around ten statements on what a good journalists should do. Afterwards, all statements are refuted one by one. The erroneous statements are: 1. Journalists themselves are the greatest source of information (external nonprofessional sources are unreliable) 2. To find out the truth, the end justifies the means (and that goes beyond journalistic ethics) 3. If one threatens you with a lawsuit, you better watch your steps (you do not have a monopoly on the truth after all) 4. Base your story on interviews (and make sure you can quote your interviewees literally) 5. Press conferences provide all relevant information, and in addition, try to pick up information from expert sources (after all, they are organized to provide the press with information ready-to-use) 6. Postpone a story to a later moment in time makes no sense (your competitors will publish it anyway) 7. Make sure that if you bring a story you can also bring the wider picture (if you can’t do so, and the Why? Question remains unanswered, you better keep your mouth) 8. Partisan journalism cannot be objective (neutrality is preferred at any time) 9. A journalist operates in the shadows, like a fly on the wall (journalists that are in the spotlight make themselves suspicious) 10. Make sure that the sources you cite are verifiable (so that there is absolute transparency of sources) ispartof: ECREA's Journalism Studies Section Conference location:Thessaloniki, Greece date:28 Mar - 29 Mar 2014 status: published

Phoebe Apperson Hearst měla velmi úspěšného vlastního syna Williama, který byl ale více jako jeho otec: tvrdý obchodník. Našla však jemnou, uměleckou duši v malíři Orrinu Peckovi (1860–1921), který byl údajně gay a který ji, ještě za života své vlastní matky, začal oslovovat „má druhá mámo.“ Na základě podrobného výzkumu jejich vzájemné korespondence v Peckově pozůstalosti se můžeme ptát, jak moc si byla progresivní, bohatá žena 19. století, jakou byla Phoebe Hearst, vědoma Peckovy sexuality a pokud ano, jestli s tím neměla problém, nebo šlo o nevyřčené tajemství mezi nimi? Jejich příběh představí historik umění Ladislav Zikmund-Lender. Phoebe Apperson Hearst had a very successful son of William, but he was more like his father: a tough businessman. However, she found a delicate, artistic soul in the painter Orrin Peck (1860–1921), who was allegedly gay and who, while still his own mother's life, began to address her as “my second mother.” Based on a detailed study of their correspondence in Peck's estate, we may ask how much a progressive, rich 19th-century woman like Phoebe Hearst was aware of Peck's sexuality, and if so, if she had no problem with it, or was it an unspoken secret between them? Their story will be presented by art historian Ladislav Zikmund-Lender.

ispartof: OpenCast Community Summit location:Valencia, Spain date:1 Mar - 3 Mar 2017 status: accepted

ispartof: BILETA Annual Conference location:online date:14 Apr - 16 Apr 2021 status: published

"Debemos unirnos a la resistencia mundial contra las políticas imperiales de las metrópolis" Recientemente nuestro compañero y amigo el joven internacionalista y estudiante de la Maestría de Estudios Latinoamericanos, del Instituto de Estudios Latinoamericanos, Bryan González Hernández ganó el concurso organizado por la Facultad de Ciencias Sociales, con su ensayo "Más allá del Libre Comercio: seguridad esencial". Para el joven estudiante Costa Rica se está enfrentando a un nuevo modelo dictatorial en América Latina, caracterizado por su fascismo simpático. Por medio de esta entrevista el grupo estudiantil Alternativas U, rinde homenaje al joven estudiante que a través de su reciente victoria, abre cada vez más espacios a los y las jóvenes que dentro y fuera de las Universidades plantean sus/nuestras alternativas, rompiendo tanto con el pensamiento único derechista, como con la "aristocracia académica" de cierta izquierda de nuestra Universidad. UCR::Vicerrectoría de Investigación::Unidades de Investigación::Ciencias Sociales::Instituto de Investigaciones Sociales (IIS)

ispartof: Instituut voor Amerikanistiek location:Antwerpen, België date:17 Sep - 17 Sep 2009 status: published

„Ein Traum ist ein Wunsch, den Dein Herz ausspricht“, singt die Heldin von Walt Disneys Cinderella. Das gilt so auch für die kollektiven Phantasien und fabrizier- ten sozialen Mythen, die wir „Filme“ nennen, und sie sind es um so mehr dann, wenn sie von gar nichts Besonderem zu handeln scheinen. Richard Dyer vertritt die These, dass „Unterhaltung“ im Wesentlichen Kompensation ist und bietet uns „etwas, nach dem wir uns zutiefst sehnen und in unserem Alltagsleben nicht finden können“. Dieses Etwas kann auch etwas sein, von dem wir gar nicht wussten, das wir es wollten. Für viele Amerikaner war ein solches Etwas Ronald Reagan, der ehemalige Filmschauspieler, der zwei Mal zum Präsidenten gewählt wurde. Politiker in liberalen Demokratien und die Produzenten der Massenkultur haben eine gemeinsame Mission: Szenarien zu entwerfen, die auf natürliche Weise hegemonial auftreten, beruhigend wirken und das größtmögliche Publikum ansprechen. Welche gesellschaftlichen Kräfte haben uns Ronald Reagan beschert, und welche kollektiven Phantasien vermochte er zu artikulieren? Und welcher historischer Prozess oder kosmischer Zufall war es, der diese Phantasien im Film Ghostbusters (1984) Gestalt annehmen ließ?